Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
MY FS FLIGHTS
Flight Score
Shorten the long landing
Ground effect becomes significant below about one wingspan of height. A Cessna 172, with a 36 ft span, enters ground effect at flare height - the float it feels in the hold-off is ground effect arriving on cue. An A320, with a span around 117 ft, has been in ground effect since before the threshold and there is no sudden cushion to feel, only a gradual reduction in induced drag that lengthens any float you allow.
Read more in Flare TimingStart to finish · 22 stages, 20 scored
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
Events
The threshold, the flare and the hold-off. The approach that led to it is the stabilisation gates below.
One stabilised approach gate: five checks where the approach path is 500 ft above the runway. The 1,000 ft gate was not assessed, because the approach did not join final that far out.
Side view — the last 1,786 m of the approach.
Plan view — the first 1,786 m of the 2,692 m runway, to the same scale as the side view.
Touched down 1,145 m past the threshold — beyond the full-score zone. The arrival was smooth.
The rest of the report
The flight began with the Airbus A300 taxiing from the parking area to the runway at Milan Malpensa International Airport, taking 7 minutes and covering a distance of 1 nautical mile. Departure roll occurred on runway 35L, with a takeoff distance of 1,430 meters, which was 41% of the runway length. The aircraft lifted off at a speed of 167 knots.
As the aircraft climbed to a higher altitude, it encountered local weather conditions of a temperature of 15 degrees Celsius and winds of 4 knots at 10 degrees. The crosswind was 1 knot, while the headwind was 4 knots. The enroute climb started overhead Ferno, Italy, and continued to an altitude of 33,156 feet above sea level, an increase of 31,387 feet in 18 minutes, covering a distance of 106 nautical miles.
The aircraft then entered a level cruise phase, starting overhead Vufflens-le-Chateau, Switzerland, and lasting 11 minutes, covering a distance of 80 nautical miles. The enroute descent phase began 1 mile north of Marcilly-sur-Tille, France, and continued to an altitude of 12,506 feet above sea level, a decrease of 20,629 feet in 16 minutes, covering a distance of 103 nautical miles.
The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, starting overhead Chartronges, France, and lasting 7 minutes, covering a distance of 33 nautical miles. The enroute descent phase began overhead Bobigny, France, and continued to an altitude of 4,016 feet above sea level, a decrease of 7,838 feet in 7 minutes, covering a distance of 32 nautical miles.
The aircraft then entered another level cruise phase, starting 2 miles south east of Adainville, France, and lasting 11 minutes, covering a distance of 25 nautical miles. The enroute descent phase began overhead Pierrelaye, France, and continued to an altitude of 1,661 feet above sea level, a decrease of 2,456 feet in 4 minutes, covering a distance of 11 nautical miles.
The final approach to runway 09L at Charles de Gaulle International Airport was made from the west, heading 85.0 degrees at 4 nautical miles and 1,305 feet above ground level. The landing occurred on runway 09L, which had a length of 2,692 meters. The threshold height was above the target, but the threshold speed was good at 136 knots.
The touchdown point was 723 meters beyond the touchdown zone, with a touchdown speed of 131 knots and a touchdown rate of -168 feet per minute, both of which were good. However, the runway touchdown position was misaligned by 13.4 meters from the centreline. The local weather conditions at the time of landing were a temperature of 15 degrees Celsius and winds of 13 knots at 140 degrees, with a crosswind of 11 knots and a headwind of 8 knots.
The total landing distance was 1,700 meters, which was 63% of the runway length. The runway rollout alignment was slightly misaligned by 12.3 meters from the centreline. The aircraft then taxied to the parking area from the runway, taking 12 minutes and covering a distance of 2 nautical miles.
The total flight distance was 400 nautical miles, taking 92 minutes, and the aircraft used 8,026 kilograms of fuel during the flight.
The Airbus A300 aircraft successfully landed on runway 09L at LFPG Charles de Gaulle International Airport, achieving an overall score of 82.1%. The final approach to the runway was initiated from the west, heading 85.0° at a distance of 4 nautical miles and an altitude of 1,305 feet above ground level (agl).
Upon landing, the aircraft touched down on the runway at a speed of 131 knots, which was within the acceptable range. The touchdown rate of -168 feet per minute (fpm) was also considered good, indicating a smooth and controlled descent. However, the threshold height at 67 feet agl was above the target, suggesting that the aircraft may have been slightly higher than desired at the moment of touchdown.
The touchdown point was located 723 meters beyond the designated touchdown zone, which is a significant deviation from the intended landing spot. This misalignment could be attributed to various factors, including wind conditions and pilot error. The runway touchdown position was also found to be misaligned by 13.4 meters from the centerline, which may have contributed to the deviation from the intended touchdown zone.
The local weather conditions at the time of landing were characterized by a temperature of 15°C and a wind speed of 13 knots from a direction of 140°. The crosswind component was 11 knots, while the headwind component was 8 knots. These conditions may have affected the aircraft's stability and control during the landing, potentially contributing to the misalignment.
The total landing distance of 1,700 meters was 63% of the available runway length, which is a relatively short distance considering the aircraft's size and weight. However, the runway rollout alignment was found to be slightly misaligned by 12.3 meters from the centerline, which may indicate some issues with the aircraft's braking or directional control during the rollout phase.
Overall, while the landing was considered successful, there were several areas for improvement, including the threshold height, touchdown point alignment, and runway rollout alignment. These issues highlight the importance of precise control and coordination during the landing phase, particularly in challenging weather conditions.
Scroll or drag the slider to zoom · double-click to reset · hover for values